Amongst the claims it's made about the Lumia 1020 are those about "reinvented zoom," extolled in this commercial that shows a roomful of parents at a school play clamoring for a closer position as they snap photos with their non-Nokia tablets and smartphones while the Lumia 1020 wielding parents calmly zoom into their photos shot from the back of the room.

As we explained in our full review of the device, the Lumia 1020 does deliver more advanced zooming capabilities than its camera phone competitors.

On most smartphones digital zoom simulates optical zoom by cropping the image and then upsampling it to the camera’s native resolution. The pixels are enlarged while image resolution and image quality are reduced. But the Lumia 1020’s high 41MP native resolution (maximum output is 38MP in 4:3, 34MP in 16:9)means that even with some digital zoom applied, the image is still downsampled through most of the zoom range. You can zoom into 2.7X (a 74mm equivalent in 4:3 mode) before the cropped image hits 5MP.

But how does the Lumia 1020 stack up against a compact camera with optical zoom?

The Canon PowerShot S120 offers 5X optical zoom with an equivalent focal length of 24-120 mm and a 12MP 1/1.7" backside-illuminated sensor. (For comparison, the Lumia 1020 offers 25mm equivalent focal length in 16:9 and 27mm in 4:3, and a 1/1.5" backside-illuminated sensor.) The Canon's optical zoom works by physically changing the focal length of the lens.

We recently put the Lumia 1020's and Canon PowerShot S210's zoom capabilities to the test. As you'll see in the first table below, we're comparing the Lumia's 27mm wide angle equivalent full resolution 38MP capture to that of the Canon's 24mm wide angle 12MP capture. We're also comparing both cameras at their full zoom capabilities: the Lumia's 2.7X digital zoom produces a 74mm equivalent 5MP capture while the Canon can zoom to 5X for a 120mm 12MP capture.

The full scene from the Lumia 1020 without zoom. The Lumia's fixed lens offers a 27mm equivalent focal length in 4:3 format.

The full scene using the Canon S120 without zoom. Note that the Canon provides a wider view from the start at the wide 24mm focal length of the lens, without as much lens distortion as the Lumia 1020.

The Lumia 1020 fully zoomed in to its maximum digital magnification, an approximately 74mm equivalent.

The Canon S120 fully zoomed in at 120mm is able to get quite a bit closer than the Lumia 1020.

Now let's take a closer look at a 100 percent crop from the full resolution 38MP Lumia 1020 image at the widest 27mm equivalent focal length and compare it to 100 percent crops from several images shot at different focal lengths using the Canon S120. Each original Canon image is a 12MP file; the lens changes the angle of view but the megapixel count stays the same. The Lumia image is exactly the same in each comparison, while the Canon images will show where an optical zoom differs.

A 100 percent crop from the full resolution 38MP Lumia 1020 image at the widest 27mm equivalent focal length in 4:3 ratio. Each image in this column is identical.

A 100 percent crop from the 24mm wide image from the Canon S120. At this perspective, the crop from the Lumia shows better detail and sharpness as it's taken from a 38MP file versus the 12MP file from the Canon.

Here we compare a 100 percent crop from a 28mm capture from the S120 on the right for a more direct focal length comparison between the two cameras.

Again, the Lumia offers better definition and sharpness at this point.

At 50mm, the magnification is nearly the same between the Lumia image above and the Canon on the right.

The two devices offer nearly the same quality of image as we can see in these 100 percent crops. It is also interesting to note the color of the sky here. As in each example, the slightly oversaturated Lumia image is pretty, but the Canon rendition is probably most accurate.

At 70mm, we can see that the optical zoom of the Canon image at right is offering a larger, sharper image than the Lumia image above.

However, the Canon also begins to exhibit some lens flare around the letters here, an unfortunate optical phenomenon the Nokia doesn't exhibit.

This final comparison shows how optical outperforms digital zoom when we look at the 100 percent crop from the 120mm fully zoomed Canon S120 capture on the right versus the Lumia image above.

Lens flare is even more pronounced in the Canon example above.

Our results show the benefits of zooming in with a compact camera over even the best-in-class smartphone. The Lumia 1020's digital zoom simply can't stack up against the Canon S120's optical zoom. The Canon can not only zoom in further, it also retains detail and sharpness better when zoomed in to its full 5X power.

Photographers and photography websites like ours will continue to debate the pros and cons of smartphone versus camera, but for now there's simply no contest when it comes to zoom.

Comments

I understand this being an old thread, but I consider this comparison apples to oranges. I own and use a 1020 everyday, I also own a Sony RX100 and several DSLR's.The basic premise here is flawed as they are comparing a 120mm optical zoom to a 74mm equivalent digi zoom. The comparison should only be made up to 74mm on both devices. This comparison would be tantamount to comparing a 24-120mm zoom lens on a DSLR to a 27-74mm lens and arriving at the conclusion that the 120mm zoom has better resolution, duh! As I said, apples and oranges.

The 1020's zoom is supposed to be used in the Lumia Camera software. Just taking the 38MP image and zooming in skips the oversampling it uses to make a "cleaner" zoomed in photo. It still wouldn't have won this comparison but it would have helped it's results a little bit.

You may argue all you want that 1020 is a "normal" mobile phone, but looking at that fat bulge makes me think many people don't know what it's like to carry a "normal" phone. It looks like I might as well be carrying a phone I like for everything, not just the camera, AND a camera since that fat behind on the 1020 would make it a pain to stash in my pocket.

For the purposes of the comparison I think they've done a fair job here. It's too bad the fanbois feel so butthurt.

The "bulge" is the optional camera grip accessory with the grip housing the extended battery and tripod mount and 2 stage button. The phone is quite flat save the circular bump for the camera. No pocket problems at all.

Before I start I'll say... I have a Nokia 1020. The thing is, I can't compare it to a digital camera I've never used, or will never use. I can only compare it to digital cameras, camera phones I've used in the past and my dslr. My reasons for posting.

1. I always carry around my phone. It's multifunctional.

2. I go trekking around places with my dslr in it's backpack, but there are many times where I don't want to get it out because I know I'm going to end up on the flor at some point and I don't want to hurt it.

3. My phone contract states that I can have a new phone every 2tyrs so I obviously went for one with the best camera.

What do I think about it: It's my phone, also my games console, I get messages and emails on it, read my e-book, find where I am. It wakes me up in the morning and gives me the days appointments. As such I didn't (and to be honest shouldn't) expect it to be as good as something that is solely a camera. However, as a backup to my dslr ... it's awesome. :)

at the risk of being obvious, lenses do work and using them to be capturing less of the scene will always mean that even a basic digicam will beat a high end phone on telephoto. Two years ago I compared my 2009 Nokia E72 to a panasonic digicam. At wide the results are better for the Nokia, but it was clear that I wouldn't even waste my time with zooming.

Had the rx100 and sold it when I got the 1020... Just don't see the point of keeping an optical zoom when I have to carry two things.

I have a young child and also work in a school as a photography teacher, cameras just don't work well with kids or at least mine lol. The 1020 is in my pocket everyday and it's RAW files are as pleasing as the rx100 and Fuji x20 units I have in my classroom BUT i do landscapes and pictures of the family where they are within 20ft. Each to their own but for me the 1020 is the one phone I have waited for, I now have something with me always that works as well as my compact.

The Lumia certainly is impressive for a smartphone. However, the Canon still is a better camera. It seems to retain more dynamic range and has more accurate colors. But apart from that, also consider that the Canon is only a camera, whereas the Nokia is a smartphone, first and foremost. That probably means lots of touch controls and only a few push-buttons. And what if you have an iPhone and purchased IOS apps? You may not want to buy this. So it will always be compromised in that regard, which is why I think the future of compact cameras isn't as doomed as some think it is.

Regarding the "constant aperture" of the Lumia; that simply isn't true. An aperture of f/2.8 means the focal length is divided by 2.8 to give you the diameter of the aperture. With a zoom, that focal length increases as you zoom in, so the diameter has to get bigger as well. With a fixed lens, it does not. The image is cropped afterwards to be equivalent to a longer FL, but the aperture diameter is still the same.

You need to also compare to a 'regular' smartphone digital zoom to truly establish the usefulness of this technology.

You'd expect a compact camera with optical zoom to outperform a smartphone with digital. But if the latter provides something that's 'good enough' in terms of zoom, it can still be a viable alternative, The traditional digital zoom on smartphones doesn't achieve that, but this Nokia technology might.

No. The Canon is f/2.8-4.5 and a 4x zoom. The Lumia is f/2.2. The effective f-stop gets multiplied by the crop factor. At 4x zoom, the Lumia would be like f/8.8 equivalent to its own sensor size. Now, one starts with 24mm eq., the other - with 28mm, sensor sizes are a bit different but you get the idea.

I've got the S100 and Pureview 808. Yeah the S100 is better at full zoom but gosh it's nice to be able shoot at 28mm (equiv) and to "zoom in post". When you get it right there is just so much content in the pureview images, but there is the rub. It takes a lot of light and (for me) a lot of luck to get it just right. If the light is not perfect, or you are not getting a good shutter speed forgetaboutit.

The S100 is no lowlight monster either. You really should point that out, zoomed into 5X the thing is like F6 or something crazy while the 808 is still shooting at F2.4 It may still be better than the 808 but if things get dim I reach for my DSLR or ILC.

we print less and less for that's an inferior media. popular A1 and B1 posters are being replaced by 42" to 72" flat panel displays, 2K now and 4K soon, and instead of electric poles and bulletin boards people now stick flyers on smart phones and PCs.

This is the digital age. I'm not saying the camera phones are better but definitely more convenient. Digital photos are destined for low resolution on Facebook or text messages and emails. Nobody prints photos anymore.Usually most bad quality photos still look great on small screens or digital photo frames. Some bigger tablets show the real noise and artifacts but lately people really don't care. I see blurry, out of focus and noisy photos and people are proud of them because they captured a moment. You ALWAYS have your phone with you, not your camera. So quality really doesn't matter so much and "normal" people are not as technical as they would care.

Nokia phones have always boasted a good camera, but lets face it most smartphones need charging every day, I would rather have a camera with a longer battery life than that. It is good to have a smartphone with a good camera, but even better to have a camera without the time-wasting phone attached. There is something satisfying about a proper camera with all its knobs and settings. We are in an age where everything is getting smaller, and 'throw away' devices. I have a Sony HX50 with 30x (24mm to 720mm) optical (60x digital) zoom, not the smallest or cheapest camera around but a fantastic piece of kit and very satisfying and solid to handle - with great flexibility, hope I will be using it for years to come.

That the Lumia offers pretty good image quality has been clear from the available samples for quite some time. I do not think you need a comparison like this. Rather, you need to focus on what you can do with a mobile camera and the related apps like Snapseed or Photoshop Touch. Surely the point about mobile photography is that the camera is only part of the package. So minisculing like this (for that is what this is) helps nobody.

I do not believe you, sorry but the 808 beats the S120 in terms of noise/detail (when you downscale the original 40MP file down to 12MP yourself and process accordingly. I've done this exercise, you probably haven't, you're just assuming. If you're referring to other aspects of performance like handling, WB or whatever then fine.

But the shots from the Nokia (at least this one) are far too contrasty and the colours are crazy. While it has captured notably more detail than the S120 at the wide end, I personally prefer the S120's image at every magnification, and suspect that at sane print size, they would most likely continue to look better. Sure, you could probably print A3 from the Nokia at the wide end in good light and it might be more tolerable that most compacts, but it seems like a very limited use case to me.

Nokia claims digital zoom is as good as sneaker zoom (walking up to the object) you have seen the ads? so why not compare IPhones etc. to 1020 with photos taken to give same coverage differentiated by camera distance?

And not shoot through a window at the Lake Union Amazon office :)Waste of my time to read.. this as no thought or effort was put into it.

Considering what the Lumia is, a smartphone, it's biting right at the heel of the s120, by all accounts, a very good point & shoot.

The difference in IQ is noticeable but still close enough to be negligible for use. Meaning, when the quality is so nearly even, there's a good argument for only just really needing to carry the lumia about with you.

What a pointless review. Why compare a phone to a camera. Does a camera make phone calls, surf the web, send emails and text messages, manage your calendar, solve your math problems, etc., etc... The phone just happens to take pictures too. And the pictures are competitive.

Nobody buys a phone just to take pictures. I know which one I would choose to carry with me. It wouldn't be the camera regardless of how good it was.

It WAS the preeminent photography website... I've been reading for years and they lost some credibility IMO.It's a review website and still the flagships Canon 1Dx and Nikon D4 haven't been reviewed. Instead they have what the duck...That's what I think... WTD?

Make this simple test: Open both Lumia full view and 2,7x zoom images in Photoshop. Make any part of these images visually of the same size. You can't see any difference. So, this 'constant aperture zoom' is a big joke. You can do this kind of zooming by software. Why selling these kind of devices having 'zooming' properties?

No matter how you slice it, crop zoom cannot match optical zoom. It's all come down to the sensor size. 1020's sensor is not a lot bigger than S120, so the result is predictable. A full frame may have a better shot...

So why do we want this feature? It helps users to get better composition. In-camera crop zoom may have small advantage with RAW data, less PP time. And most importantly, crop zoom can be very useful for HD Video mode. Something I like to see being implemented on all new camera.

The Nokia is still surprisingly good and for posting online purposes more than sufficient. If you only carry a mobile phone then using the Nokia is much better than having no point and shoot with you. That the quality of a mobile is coming even close to the S120 is no small feet and is impressive nonetheless.

If you consider that most people take most pictures in the focal range of 24 ... 50 mm focal length, where the Nokia even exhibits an edge this becomes even more darn amazing! If I would own both devices, I/d probably sell the S120 :-)

This is way oversaturated which contributes a lot to the noise you're seeing. If you shoot with the Canon's saturation and then resize to the Canon's 12MP, the noise levels will be the same and the Nokia will have clearly more detail.

For photos, this is only step one for the S120. It also shoots RAW. The quality difference of the RAW vs JPEG on the S series cameras can be significant (not always, but can be). Especially if you are looking to get details out of blown highlights or deep shadows, sharpen during demosaicing, or need to adjust white balance.

Nokia can tell whatever they want but sadly you just can't (yet) beat physics. No matter how good your eyesight is, if you can't get up close you'll always see less than someone else who can. Now if they can cram in there an optical zoom...but I doubt it will happen.

Remember the era of 35mm film? The 35mm focal length was pretty much all the ordinary Joe needed. The zoom for most is just another sales pitch, the lenses are too slow anyway to catch anything other than a blurry mess and composition isn't exactly a word people bother looking in the dictionary.

I suspect you're trolling, but in terms of camera "capability," the S120 wipes the floor with any mobile phone available today just by having enough buttons and dials to make most settings changes very quickly without digging into menus. By the time you finish customizing the ISO setting, white balance, etc., on that touch screen, I'll have finished photographing and put the camera back in my pocket. The world's best sensor ain't gonna help you if you aren't ready to shoot.

The surprise is that the Nokia beats the Canon at wide angle. Downsize the Nokia image at 12MP and shoot wide more moderate saturation (or in RAW) and you'll get an image with the same levels of noise as the Canon, but with clearly more detail.

The Canon looks consistently better to me from these shots which is slightly surprising. When I did the same test between my Canon s95 and Nokia 808, the 808 was clearly (quite a lot) better in terms of resolution at 28mm but as soon as I started "zooming" the limitations of digital zoom became very clear.

Going to the top of a building and zooming in is a really good example of how people like to shoot photography today. Not being sarcastic, but people are more concerned about how their camera performs on technical specifics rather than message, lighting, and composition. This is demonstrated by the numerous articles online on how people love to turn off all the lights in their kitchen and take pictures in the dark with the Nokia.

Zoom aside, how about an overall comparison? I still carry an advanced compact (LF1, even longer zoom than the S120 at the same size, plus EVF) and I've had a few decent smartphone cameras but nothing that would make me drop the compact, haven't had a Pureview mind you... Maybe a critical IQ comparison once RAW is available on the Nokia?

Photoshop. GoPro. Every once in a while a product emerges that defines a category. And sometimes, it vanishes just as quickly as it arrived on the scene. This week's Throwback Thursday remembers the Flip, the pocket camcorder everyone had – until they didn't.

After a popular Facebook teaser and some studio portrait samples, Godox has finally officially released the Godox A1 smartphone flash and flash trigger. Cheap, versatile and innovative, color us intrigued.

Canon’s EOS 5D Mk IV has won the European Imaging and Sound Association’s Professional DSLR of the Year award, making this the third year in a row that the brand has beaten Nikon to the top spot in the professional camera category.

Edward Weston was one of the most influential photographers of the 20th century, and in this episode of Advancing Your Photography we learn the extreme technique he used to capture one of his most famous still life photos.

Venus Optics has announced the price and delivery date of the second lens to join its Zero-D line up: the 15mm F2 for Sony’s E mount. A lens they've dubbed, "the world's fastest 15mm rectilinear lens for full-frame."

The Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM is an understated jewel of a lens, and one that we've enjoyed on a variety of cameras since its release almost five years ago. Its relatively small size and image stabilization make it a versatile tool for a variety of photography - check out our sample gallery.

You don't need a fancy studio or tons of gear to capture the kind of classic product photography you see in magazines. In this video, Dustin Dolby shows you how to do it with just a couple of speedlights and some know-how.

The Minolta MC Rokkor-X 40-80mm F2.8 is unlike any zoom lens you've probably ever seen. Instead of a helicoid, it uses a gearbox, and because of this it's still one of the sharpest zoom lenses out there.

If you're looking to switch to Sony, the company's new limited-time "α trade up" promotion can snag you up to $500 + trade-in value towards a brand new a9, a7 II, a7R II, or a7S II when you hand over your DSLR or mirrorless camera.

The Google Camera app exclusive to the company's own Pixel phone has been unofficially ported to other Android devices. If you're willing to take the risk of installing, you can now use features like HDR+ on the Galaxy S8, LG G6, OnePlus 5, and more.